Kingsbury, G. G., & Weiss, D. J.. (1980). A comparison of adaptive, sequential, and conventional testing strategies for mastery decisions (Research Report 80-4). Minneapolis, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, Computerized Adaptive Testing Laboratory.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1999). Standard errors of proficiency estimates in stratum scored CAT. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (2008). ICAT: An adaptive testing procedure for the identification of idiosyncratic knowledge patterns. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, 40-48.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Weiss, D. J.. (1983). A comparison of IRT-based adaptive mastery testing and a sequential mastery testing procedure. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 1-8). New York: Academic Press.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1991). A comparison of procedures for content-sensitive item selection. Applied Measurement in Education.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1990). Assessing the utility of item response models: Computerized adaptive testing. In A paper presented to the annual meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education. Boston MA.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1984). Adaptive self-referenced testing as a procedure for the measurement of individual change in instruction: A comparison of the reliabilities of change estimates obtained from conventional and adaptive testing procedures. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univerity of Minnesota, Minneapolis.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (2007). ICAT: An adaptive testing procedure to allow the identification of idiosyncratic knowledge patterns. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.). Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Weiss, D. J.. (1979). An adaptive testing strategy for mastery decisions (Research Report 79-5). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1997). Some questions that must be addressed to develop and maintain an item pool for use in an adaptive test. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Zara, A.. (1999). A procedure to compare conventional and adaptive testing procedures for making single-point decisions. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Kingsbury, G., & Zara, T.. (2017). From Blueprints to Systems: An Integrated Approach to Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CBaAfH4ES7XivmvrMjPeKyFCsFZOpQMJ

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1993). Assessing the utility of item response models: computerized adaptive testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12, 21-27.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1990). Adapting adaptive testing: Using the MicroCAT Testing System in a local school district. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 29 (2), 3-6.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1989). Assessing the impact of using item parameter estimates obtained from paper-and-pencil testing for computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. San Francisco.

Kingsbury, G. G. (2011). Continuous Testing (an avenue for CAT research). In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1999). Developing computerized adaptive tests for school children. In . F. Drasgow and J. B. Olson-Buchanan (Eds.), Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 93-115). Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Zara, A.. (1991). A comparison of procedures for content-sensitive item selection in computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 4, 241-261.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1997). Item pool development and maintenance. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Zara, A.. (1999). A comparison of conventional and adaptive testing procedures for making single-point decisions. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Kingsbury, G. G. (2002). An empirical comparison of achievement level estimates from adaptive tests and paper-and-pencil tests. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. USA.

Kingsbury, G. G., & et. al.,. (1988). Computerized adaptive testing: A four-year-old pilot study shows that CAT can work. Technological Horizons in Education, 16 (4), 73-76.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1988). A comparison of achievement level estimates from computerized adaptive testing and paper-and-pencil testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans LA.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Weiss, D. J.. (1981). A validity comparison of adaptive and conventional strategies for mastery testing (Research Report 81-3). Minneapolis, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, Computerized Adaptive Testing Laboratory.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Wise, S. L.. (2020). Three Measures of Test Adaptation Based on Optimal Test Information. Journal of Computerized Adaotive Testing, 8(1), 1-19. doi:10.7333/2002-0801001

Kim-Kang, G., & Weiss, D. J.. (2008). Adaptive measurement of individual change. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 216, 49-58. doi:10.1027/0044-3409.216.1.49

Kim-Kang, G., & Weiss, D. J.. (2007). Comparison of computerized adaptive testing and classical methods for measuring individual change. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.). Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Kim, J., Chung, H., Dodd, B. G., & Park, R.. (2012). Panel Design Variations in the Multistage Test Using the Mixed-Format Tests. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 574-588. doi:10.1177/0013164411428977

Kim, H., & Plake, B. S.. (1993). Monte Carlo simulation comparison of two-stage testing and computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Atlanta, GA.

Kim, D. - H., & Huynh, H.. (2008). Computer-Based and Paper-and-Pencil Administration Mode Effects on a Statewide End-of-Course English Test. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 554-570. doi:10.1177/0013164407310132

Kim, H. - O. (1994). Monte Carlo simulation comparison of two-stage testing and computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 54, 2548.

Kim, J., & McLean, J. E.. (1995). The influence of examinee test-taking behavior motivation in computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. San Francisco CA.

Kim, J. (1993). Individual differences in computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. New Orleans LA.

Kim, S., Moses, T., & Yoo, H. (Henry). (2015). A Comparison of IRT Proficiency Estimation Methods Under Adaptive Multistage Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 52, 70–79. doi:10.1111/jedm.12063

Killcross, M. C., & Cassie, A.. (1973). The potential use of tailored testing for allocation to army employments. In NATO Conference on Utilisation of Human Resources. presented at the 06/1973, Lisbon, Portugal.

Killcross, M. C. (1976). A review of research in tailored testing (Report APRE No. 9/76, Farnborough, Hants, U. K.: Ministry of Defence, Army Personnel Research Establishment.).

Killcross, M. C. (1977). Real-data simulation of a proposal for tailored teting. In Third International Conference on Educational Testing. presented at the 06/1977, Leyden, The Netherlands.

Killcross, M. C. (1974). A tailored testing system for selection and allocation in the British Army. In Paper presented at the 18th International Congress of Applied Psychology. Montreal Canada.

Kiely, G. L., Zara, A., & Weiss, D. J.. (1983). Alternate forms reliability and concurrent validity of adaptive and conventional tests with military recruits. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Computerized Adaptive Testing Laboratory.

Karino, C. A., Costa, D. R., & Laros, J. A.. (2009). Adequacy of an item pool measuring proficiency in English language to implement a CAT procedure. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2009 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Kappauf, W. E. (1969). Use of an on-line computer for psychological testing with the up-and-down method. American Psychologist, 24, 207-211.

Kaplan, M., & de la Torre, J.. (2020). A Blocked-CAT Procedure for CD-CAT. Applied Psychological Measurement, 44, 49-64. doi:10.1177/0146621619835500

Kaplan, M., de la Torre, J., & Barrada, J. R.. (2015). New Item Selection Methods for Cognitive Diagnosis Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39, 167-188. doi:10.1177/0146621614554650

Kang, H. - A., Zhang, S., & Chang, H. - H.. (2017). Dual-Objective Item Selection Criteria in Cognitive Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54, 165–183. doi:10.1111/jedm.12139

Kang, H. - A., & Chang, H. - H.. (2016). Parameter Drift Detection in Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing Based on Informational Distance/Divergence Measures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40, 534-550. doi:10.1177/0146621616663676

Kandula, S., Ancker, J. S., Kaufman, D. R., Currie, L. M., & Qing, Z. - T.. (2011). A new adaptive testing algorithm for shortening health literacy assessments. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 11(52). doi:10.1186/1472-6947-11-52

Kamakura, W. A.,, & Balasubramanian, S. K.. (1989). Tailored interviewing: An application of item response theory for personality measurement. Journal of Personality Assessment, 53, 502-519.

Kalohn, J. (2000). Test security and item exposure control for computer-based . In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Educatio. Chicago.

Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A.. (1998). Effect of item selection on item exposure rates within a computerized classification test. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. San Diego CA.

Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A.. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 47-59.

Kalisch, S. J. (1973). A tailored testing model employing the beta distribution and conditional difficulties. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 1, 111-120.

Kalisch, S. J. (1980). Computerized instructional adaptive testing model: Formulation and validation (AFHRL-TR-79-33, Final Report). Brooks Air Force Base TX: Air Force Human Resources Laboratory", Also Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, February 1981, 11, 20 (Ms. No, 2217) .

Kalisch, S. J. (1974). A tailored testing model employing the beta distribution (unpublished manuscript). Florida State University, Educational Evaluation and Research Design Program.

Kalisch, S. J. (1974). The comparison of two tailored testing models and the effects of the models variables on actual loss. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida State University.

Kalisch, S. J. (1974). A tailored testing model employing the beta distribution and conditional difficulties. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 1, 22-28.

Kalisch, S. J. (1980). A model for computerized adaptive testing related to instructional situations. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.). Proceedings of the 1979 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference (pp. 101-119). Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, Computerized Adaptive Testing Laboratory.

Kalinowski, K. E., Natesan, P., & Henson, R. K.. (2014). Stratified Item Selection and Exposure Control in Unidimensional Adaptive Testing in the Presence of Two-Dimensional Data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 563-576. doi:10.1177/0146621614536768

Kalender, I. (2011). Effects of Different Computerized Adaptive Testing Strategies of Recovery of Ability. THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY.

Kalender, I. (2012). Computerized Adaptive Testing for Student Selection to Higher Education. Journal of Higher Education.

Kahler, C. W., Strong, D. R., Read, J. P., De Boeck, P., Wilson, M., Acton, G. S., et al.. (2005). Toward efficient and comprehensive measurement of the alcohol problems continuum in college students: The Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire. Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research, 29, 1180-1189.